1. Benchmarking for Improved Water Utility Performance

2. Benchmarking Water Services m.blokland@unesco-ihe.org

3. Contributing Partners UNESCO-IHE USP of Brazil CEPT University of India NWSC of Uganda Vewin/CDC of the Netherlands

4. Topic 3: Benchmarking in the Water and Sanitation Sector

5. Application of benchmarking in the water sector: In water and wastewater utilities: Instruments are well established Practiced by a minority of utilities In river basin organisations: Instruments are being established Practiced mostly on a pilot basis Application

6. ‘Performance assessment’ (or ‘metric benchmarking’) performance measurement: e.g. ‘% of population served’ or ‘labour productivity’ performance comparison: comparison over time, with another water provider, with a guideline/standard ‘Performance improvement (or ‘process benchmarking’) performance improvement deals with discovering the differences in the underlying policies, processes and methods being used: e.g. on leakage detection in an effort to reduce Non Revenue Water processes can be compared between water utilities but also between a water utility and an organisation in another sector: e.g. an energy provider on billing and revenue collection Application

7. terms now considered inappropriate by IWA Source: Cabrera et al, 2011 Application

8. Benchmarking as a continuous process: Source: Dane, 2009 Application

9. PreparationPerformance Assessment Performance Improvement Project planning Orientation, training and project control Data acquisition and validation Data analysis assessment reporting Improvement actions Review of improvement actions Objectives Scope deliverables Governance Milestones schedules Financial planning Code of conduct Recruitment participants Preparation of data management Pre- analysis of utility data Data analysis and visualisation of results Utility individual report Consortium & Public reports Assessment of best practices workshop Workshop document Identify improvement actions Prioritize improvement actions Preparation of action plan, resources and targets Implementati on of Action #1 Implementati on of Action #2 Documentation of progress and results 2 1 3 1 2 3 Source: Cabrera et al. 2011

10. Difficulties when comparing performance (surface water vs. groundwater, topography, availability of water resources, per capita GNP, cost of resources, etc.) within the same country, but probably more so when comparing across countries or even continents Example: A utility operating in a relatively flat, industrialized country such as the Netherlands, with access to an abundance of water resources, with a high average per capita income and low urbanization rates has less challenges to address than a utility operating in water- scarce and mountainous areas of Mexico, with a much lower per capita income This means that when we compare performance, we must be aware of contextual differences between utilities. IWA has introduced contextual indicators to help explain differences in performance Source: Alegre et al, 2006 International Water Association Application

11. Performance Assessment Indicator2002 Population served538,600 Water supply connections131,136 No of Employees762 Unaccounted for water (UFW)32% Working Ratio0.62 Staff per 1000 connections5.66 Service coverage – water supply85% Average domestic tariff (US$/m 3 )0.18 Is this utility well performing? Application

12. Performance assessment: comparison over time The same utility….is it performing well now? KPI200020012002 Population served460,900480,000538,600 Water supply connections94,724112,427131,136 No of Employees713730762 Unaccounted for water24%28%32% Working Ratio0.820.670.62 Staff per 1000 connections7.206.495.66 Service coverage – water supply75%80%85% Average domestic tariff (US$/m 3 )0.300.400.45 Application

13. SEAWUN : 39 South East Asian utilities Source: SEAWUN & ADB, 2007 Cost Components: Personnel Power/Fuel Other Application

14. % of customer calls answered within 20 seconds Performance of worst performers improved significantly Vewin: 10 Dutch water supply companies Source: VEWIN, 2007, 2010 Application

15. Performance comparison across countries Source: NUS, 2006 Application

16. Source: Eureau, 2008 Performance comparison across countries Application

17. England and Wales (post-privatisation) Performance comparison over time Application privatization

18. England and Wales (post-privatisation) Performance comparison over time Application

19. England and Wales (post-privatisation) Performance comparison over time